CVE-2024-53246 - Unpacking the Splunk SPL Information Disclosure Vulnerability

Splunk is the backbone SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) solution for many organizations, often ingesting logs from all corners of enterprise infrastructure. Vulnerabilities in this platform can have dangerous ripple effects. Among the latest is CVE-2024-53246, a subtle but impactful flaw that exposes sensitive information via a search command, but only when chained with another bug, like a risky command bypass.

Let’s break down what this vulnerability means, how it works, and what defenders and attackers should know.

Versions below 9.3.2408.101, 9.2.2406.106, 9.2.2403.111, and 9.1.2312.206

If exploited, a user could use a specially crafted SPL (Search Processing Language) command to extract sensitive data. However, it’s not “click-and-pwn”—exploitation requires chaining with another vulnerability (for example: bypassing Splunk’s built-in checks for risky commands).

Why Is This a Problem?

Attackers who can sneak their own SPL queries onto Splunk can use this bug to read logs or system details they shouldn’t access, potentially deepening a breach or expanding their foothold within your network.

The SPL Command Angle

Splunk’s search bar is powered by SPL—a flexible query language that lets admins wrangle massive data sets. But its power is also its weakness: certain SPL commands can let a user pull in more system-level information than intended.

In this case, a protected SPL command (redacted here for safety) inadvertently exposes sensitive details. Normally, Splunk blocks “risky commands” using configuration settings or role-based access control.

Chaining Vulnerabilities

Imagine an attacker already has limited access to Splunk, perhaps through a low-privileged account or a stolen API token. They cannot run powerful commands directly—unless they find another weakness that lets them bypass Splunk’s risky command filter.

Example Attack Chain

1. Find/Exploit Risky Command Bypass:

Example Code: Bypassing and Abusing SPL

> *Note: Example is illustrative only—do NOT use on live Splunk instances.*

Suppose the risky SPL command is | rest (rest endpoints can sometimes expose sensitive details). The attacker would run:

| rest /services/authentication/users
| table title, roles, email, type

This command could dump user accounts, roles, and other details.

However, Splunk by default blocks rest for unprivileged users. If an attacker finds a bypass (e.g., due to misconfiguration or another bug), CVE-2024-53246 would allow them to use this vector.

Attack Surface: Internal Splunk users or external attackers who’ve breached the perimeter.

- Pre-req: Some other vulnerability (like a command block bypass, weak RBAC configuration, or older discoverable Splunk bugs).
- Impact: Exposure of configuration files, logs, credentials, tokens, or even indexed secrets, depending on data stored in Splunk.

Example Exploit Workflow

import requests

url = "https://splunk.example.com:8089/services/search/jobs";
auth = ('user', 'password') # Could be stolen low-level credentials

data = {
    'search': '| rest /servicesNS/-/-/admin'  # Hypothetical dangerous SPL
}

# If Risky Command Bypass works
r = requests.post(url, auth=auth, data=data, verify=False)
print(r.text)

Patch Immediately:

If your Splunk Enterprise or Splunk Cloud Platform is below the fixed versions, patch now. See the official advisory here.

Limit SPL Access:

Limit who can run dangerous SPL commands by reviewing RBAC and disabling unneeded risky commands entirely.

Audit User Activity:

Check audit logs for strange or unexpected SPL commands, especially those accessing internal endpoints or configurations.

Monitor for Exploitation:

Set up alerts for risky command usage (e.g., “rest”, “inputcsv”, “outputcsv”, etc.), especially if coming from unusual users or API tokens.

References and More Reading

- Splunk SVD-2024-0601 Official Advisory - 2024-06-06
- Splunk REST API Documentation
- Common Splunk Security Best Practices
- CVE Details for CVE-2024-53246 (when available)

Conclusion

CVE-2024-53246 demonstrates that even with role-based protections and “safe by default” configurations, chaining bugs can still lead to serious leaks. Splunk admins should immediately patch, review access controls, and stay vigilant for unusual activity. Attackers are constantly probing for exactly this kind of loophole—don’t let your SIEM become their window into your organization.

Stay safe, and always test your Splunk defenses!

Disclaimer:
This article is for educational awareness and authorized defender use only. Never exploit vulnerabilities on systems you do not own or have explicit permission to test.

Timeline

Published on: 12/10/2024 18:15:41 UTC
Last modified on: 01/15/2025 17:05:41 UTC